The discussion revolves around the unusual characteristics of a skull associated with the Starchild Project, raising questions about its origins and the validity of claims made by its proponents. Participants explore various explanations, including pathological conditions, genetic mutations, and even extraterrestrial origins, while expressing skepticism about the evidence presented.
Participants generally do not reach a consensus, with multiple competing views remaining on the nature of the skull and the validity of the claims surrounding it. Skepticism about the evidence and the interpretations of its significance is prevalent.
Limitations include the absence of concrete evidence validating the skull's existence and authenticity, as well as unresolved questions regarding the methodologies used in any proposed testing.
ah huh...or maybe its the mainstream position simply because we know pathology accounts for a lot, genetics determines our structure, environment can affect it etc. Occams Razor and all that...yeah, you know where I stand.Mainstream Position:
Pathology--genetic (inherited) or congenital (birth defect)--is the standard explanation for any human-like skullb that does not fit the "normal" human mold.In the hands of scientists dedicated to pounding square pegs into the round hole of conventional thinking, pathologycan be made to cover virtually any deviation.
In truth, a unique combination of extraordinary pathological disorders is a possible explanation for the many aberrations evident in the child's skull. Absent overwhelming evidence to the contrary, mainstream science will insist the skull has resulted from nothing more than multiple pathological defects.
This opinion will always dominate any others because of the combined academic credentials of those who will profess it. This is reality; we all know it.
LOL...HAHAHHA..HAHAHHAH..OMG these sorts of people amuse the hell out of me. I can't wait for the day that these people grow up, and look back at the twisted 'rationality' that they use in the analysis of situations.Points Supporting Non-Earth Origin:
The long-standing Star Being legends of Central and South America provide a plausible mechanism for how a highly
abnormal skull (relative to humans) might have been biologically created rather than genetically or congenitally
malformed, or physically manipulated by deliberate deformation (binding).
Such immense deformation across the entire occipital (rear) and parietal (upper side) areas of the skull could not
result from binding without deformation being visible in the frontal area, which is not evident.
Birth defects across the entire occipital and parietal areas, while not impossible, seem highly unlikely because of the
remarkable symmetry exhibited in all areas of the skull, including those effected by the deformations.
The terrain of the bone in the eye sockets contains incredibly subtle indentations and ridges that are perfectly
symmetrical in both sockets, which simply have to have been formed by genetic directions rather than by
deformations.
The rear deformation extends from the crown to very near the foramen magnum, an area impossible to reach by any
binding device due to the thick neck muscles (even in a child) that surround and support the skull-spine connection.
Head binding cannot extend below the inion (the bump at the back of the head).
Head binding leaves a gaping opening at the top where skull bones fail to fuse.
The bottom line is that even though the skull's highly unusual characteristics demand an open-minded approach to it, mainstream science will reject it outright until forced by DNA evidence to do otherwise. Indeed, it could turn out to be nothing more than a butt-ugly kid with an extraordinary combination of cranial deformities never seen before. But it could also have been the result of a human-alien union, or an outright alien with no connection to humanity at all.
Only time and testing will tell which possibility is correct.
Originally posted by Another God
Yeah true, it is a very strange skull.
My first thought is : Does it exist? Have we any external validation of its existence? (personally, this guy's word and some pictures don't convince me of anything)
Secondly: In validating its existence, has its authenticity as an actual been validated? Pye says experiments are being done on it...but again, I don't trust his word yet. Where is the paperwork which proves this thing exists, as a real skull?
Once I had verified that this thing even exists as it is supposed to, I would then think about it more. The DNA extraction should show mutations in it which explain some of the deformation I would say.
Have you seen the images of all those babies in large alcohol filled jars kept as a result of the radiation issues after Chernobyl? There is some freaky stuff there too!
(And no one claims that they are aliens...)
(well, some might...freaks.)
Originally posted by Another God
well, that looks a lot more convincing. I am now forced to take on the stand point, that the most likely explanation is that it is either a genetic disorder, or a result of 'binding' or whatever it was. Either of those is MUCH more likely than 'Aliens came, made a half man alien thing, and then left it to die'